Publication trends in spine research from 2007 to 2016: Comparison of the Orthopaedic Research Society Spine Section and the International Society for the Study of the Lumbar Spine.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Martin JT
PROVIDER: S-EPMC5944392 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundHistopathological analysis of intervertebral disc (IVD) tissues is a critical domain of back pain research. Identification, description, and classification of attributes that distinguish abnormal tissues form a basis for probing disease mechanisms and conceiving novel therapies. Unfortunately, lack of standardized methods and nomenclature can limit comparisons of results across studies and prevent organizing information into a clear representation of the hierarchical, spatial, and temporal patterns of IVD degeneration. Thus, the following Orthopaedic Research Society (ORS) Spine Section Initiative aimed to develop a standardized histopathology scoring scheme for human IVD degeneration.MethodsGuided by a working group of experts, this prospective process entailed a series of stages that consisted of reviewing and assessing past grading schemes, surveying IVD researchers globally on current practice and recommendations for a new grading system, utilizing expert opinion a taxonomy of histological grading was developed, and validation performed.ResultsA standardized taxonomy was developed, which showed excellent intra-rater reliability for scoring nucleus pulposus (NP), annulus fibrosus (AF), and cartilaginous end plate (CEP) regions (interclass correlation [ICC] > .89). The ability to reliably detect subtle changes varied by IVD region, being poorest in the NP (ICC: .89-.95) where changes at the cellular level were important, vs the AF (ICC: .93-.98), CEP (ICC: .97-.98), and boney end plate (ICC: .96-.99) where matrix and structural changes varied more dramatically with degeneration.ConclusionsThe proposed grading system incorporates more comprehensive descriptions of degenerative features for all the IVD sub-tissues than prior criteria. While there was excellent reliability, our results reinforce the need for improved training, particularly for novice raters. Future evaluation of the proposed system in real-world settings (eg, at the microscope) will be needed to further refine criteria and more fully evaluate utility. This improved taxonomy could aid in the understanding of IVD degeneration phenotypes and their association with back pain.
| S-EPMC8313169 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Study designThis was a survey of the surgeon members of the Lumbar Spine Research Society (LSRS).ObjectiveThe purpose of this study was to assess trends in surgical practice and patient management involving elective and emergency surgery in the early months of the coronavirus pandemic.Summary of background dataThe novel coronavirus has radically disrupted medical care in the first half of 2020. Little data exists regarding the exact nature of its effect on spine care.MethodsA 53-question survey was sent to the surgeon members of the LSRS. Respondents were contacted via email 3 times over a 2-week period in late April. Questions concentrated on surgical and clinical practice patterns before and after the pandemic. Other data included elective surgical schedules and volumes, as well as which emergency cases were being performed. Surgeons were asked about the status of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) virus testing. Circumstances for performing surgical intervention on patients with and without testing as well as patients testing positive were explored.ResultsA total of 43 completed surveys were returned of 174 sent to active surgeons in the LSRS (25%). Elective lumbar spine procedures decreased by 90% in the first 2 months of the pandemic, but emergency procedures did not change. Patients with "stable" lumbar disease had surgeries deferred indefinitely, even beyond 8 weeks if necessary. In-person outpatient visits became increasingly rare events, as telemedicine consultations accounted for 67% of all outpatient spine appointments. In total, 91% surgeons were under some type of confinement. Only 11% of surgeons tested for the coronavirus on all surgical patients.ConclusionsElective lumbar surgery was significantly decreased in the first few months of the coronavirus pandemic, and much of outpatient spine surgery was practiced via telemedicine. Despite these constraints, spine surgeons performed emergency surgery when indicated, even when the COVID-19 status of patients was unknown.Level of evidenceLevel IV.
| S-EPMC8628851 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background contextLumbar radiofrequency ablation (RFA) is an intervention used to treat facet-mediated chronic low back pain. In some studies with methods consistent with clinical practice guidelines, RFA results in improvements in pain and functional limitations. However, in other studies, RFA demonstrates limited benefit. Despite unanswered questions regarding efficacy of RFA, its use is widespread.PurposeTo describe trends in the utilization and cost of lumbar RFA and lumbar facet injections.Study design/settingRetrospective cohort study.Patient sampleThe sample was derived from the IBM/Watson MarketScan Commercial Claims and Encounters Databases from 2007 to 2016.Outcome measuresLongitudinal trends in the distribution and quantity of lumbar facet injections before lumbar RFA, corticosteroid administration during lumbar facet injections, progression to lumbar RFA after lumbar facet injections, lumbar RFA utilization, and costs of these interventions.MethodsTwo primary cohorts were identified from patients who received lumbar RFA or lumbar facet injection procedures. Utilization rates per 100,000 enrollees were determined for both cohorts. The mean, median, and interquartile ranges of the number of facets targeted and costs per procedure were calculated by year and laterality, as well as overall. Costs in 2018 dollars were estimated by summing gross payment totals from patients and insurance plans. This study was supported by funds from the NIH, and has no conflict of interest associated biases.ResultsFrom 2007 to 2016, lumbar RFA sessions performed per 100,000 enrollees per year increased from 49 to 113, a 130.6% overall increase (9.7% annually). Lumbar facet injection use increased from 201 to 251 sessions per 100,000 enrollees, a 24.9% overall increase (2.5% annually). In the year after a lumbar facet injection, 26.7% of patients received lumbar RFA; 28.6% received another injection but not RFA; and 44.7% received neither. The number of patients receiving two lumbar facet injection procedures prior to lumbar RFA grew from 51.1% in 2010 to 58.8% in 2016. For lumbar RFA, the cost per 100,000 enrollees went from $94,570 in 2007 to $266,680 in 2016, a 12.2% annual increase. For lumbar facet injections, the cost per 100,000 enrollees went from $257,280 in 2007 to $396,580 in 2016, a 4.9% annual increase.ConclusionsThis analysis showed consistent growth in both the frequency and procedure cost of lumbar RFA and facet injections among a large, national, commercially insured population from 2007 to 2016.
| S-EPMC6534485 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Patients with lumbar disc disease may present with low back pain, pain that radiates down into the lower extremity (radiculopathy), and leg pain that increases with ambulation (neurogenic claudication). Patients may first undergo diagnostic studies [(magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and computed tomographic (CT) examinations] to determine whether there is any significant nerve root or thecal sac compression.Increasingly, patients with low back pain with/without radiculopathy are being screened by nurses rather than by neurologists or neurosurgeons/orthopedists. Recognition of the basic neurological symptoms and signs of lumbar disc disease is critical to manage and triage these patients.The neurological examination includes evaluation of the straight leg raising test [straight leg raise (SLR)/Lasegue Maneuver], and assessment of: motor function [grade 0 (no motion) to 5 (normal motion)], reflexes [patellar and Achilles levels graded 0 (absent) to 4+ (clonus)], sensory loss (pin prick, light touch, position, and vibration), and cerebellar function (tandem gait, heel-shin, and finger-nose-finger). Learning to read MR and CT studies for disc herniations is critical. Nonsurgical discs include those that are minimally protruding or bulging. Alternatively, surgical disc herniations are extruded (ruptured through the annulus) or sequestrated (migrated beyond the disc space following rupture).Familiarity with symptoms, neurological signs, and radiographic presentation for patients with lumbar disc disease is critical for nurses. Here we review the important factors nurses should know to better recognize/triage, and treat patients with lumbar disc disease.
| S-EPMC5523470 | biostudies-other
Project description:The lumbar spine includes 5 lumbar vertebral bodies, L1, L2, L3, L4, and L5. At each level, there is a disc space defined by the two bones (vertebral bodies) in the back; for example, there is a disc space at the L5-S1 level etc. The normal front to back (anterior to posterior or AP diameter) measurement of the spinal canal is typically 18-20 mm, but some patients have narrowing called spinal stenosis.Lumbar stenosis is defined by two major types. Central stenosis compresses the midline (in the middle) sac of nerve tissue (dural or thecal sac containing the lumbar nerve roots). Lateral recess stenosis (off to the sides) compresses the individual exiting nerve roots.At each lumbar level, there may be compression of the nerve tissue centrally (dura also called cauda equina) or the nerve roots (on one or both sides). Compression may occur due to soft or calcified discs in the front (anteriorly) of the spine at different levels or from behind (posteriorly) due to arthritic enlargement (hypertrophy) or calcification (ossification) of the yellow ligament, facet joints, and/or bones (laminae). Surgery to remove bone and arthritic structures from the back of the spinal canal to decompress nerve tissue is called a laminectomy.Patients with narrowing of the lumbar spinal canal may have central or lateral recess stenosis that compresses the thecal sac and/or exiting nerve roots at any of 5 levels. Laminectomy, performed at single or multiple levels, decompresses lumbar spinal stenosis.
| S-EPMC5523509 | biostudies-other
Project description:PurposeIt is important to assess global trends in the practice of adult reconstruction orthopaedic surgery to understand how new evidence is being implemented. The International Society of Orthopaedic Centers (ISOC) is a consortium of academic orthopaedic centers whose members' practices likely reflect contemporary evidence and indicate how orthopaedic surgery residents and fellows are trained.MethodsWe administered a 65 question, electronic survey of adult reconstruction surgeons across the ISOC centers in September 2020 to assess practice patterns. Results were assessed using descriptive statistics or by modeling the underlying response distribution, and the analysis was stratified by hospital region.Results79 surgeons across 19 ISOC centers in 5 continents (Asia, Australia, Europe, North America, South America) completed the survey. Selected findings include: in total hip arthroplasty (THA), the posterolateral approach was used for 71 ± 42% of THA (mean ± standard deviation) and the direct anterior approach in 18% ± 34%. In total knee arthroplasty, posterior-stabilized (66% ± 39%) and cruciate-retaining (19 ± 33%) implants were most common. Robots were available in 56% (44 of 79) of surgeons' centers more commonly in Asia, Australia, and North America. Tranexamic acid was routinely used in arthroplasty by 99% (78 of 79) of surgeons. Eighty-six percent (68 of 79) submit data to joint or other registries. Virtual visits were used for 13% ± 16% of outpatient visits and by 82% (64 of 79) of surgeons overall.ConclusionsThese findings may be of use now for surgeons to consider the practices of their peers at high-volume academic institutions, and in the future as we track temporal trends.
| S-EPMC7821987 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundExosomes are small vesicles of endosomal origin, and they can be used for the diagnosis and the treatment. However, limited data were for the evaluation of the trend of exosome researches. This study aims to investigate the trend of exosome researches and compare the contribution of research from different regions, organizations and authors.MethodsExosome related publications from 2007 to 2016 were retrieved from the Web of Science database. Excel, GraphPad Prism 5 and VOSviewer software were used to analyze the research trend.ResultsA total of 1852 papers were identified and were cited 62967 times. The United States accounted for 38.8% of the articles, 42.0% of the citations, and the highest H-index (76). China ranked the second in the number of articles, but the sixth in citation frequency (4337) and the fourth in H-index (36). The journals, PLoS ONE and J Biol Chem had the highest number of publications. The author, Gabrielsson S., has published the most papers in this field (22). The keyword "ribonucleic acid" was mentioned the most at 746 times, and the words, "stem cell", "drug resistance" and "monocyte cell factor" were the latest hotspots appeared around 2015.ConclusionLiterature growth related to exosome is expanding rapidly. The quality of the articles from China still requires improvement. Recent studies focus on the relationship with tumor, and "stem cell", "drug resistance" and "michigan cancer foundation-7" may be the newest topics that should be closely followed in exosome research.
| S-EPMC5564662 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTo determine a direct measure of publication bias by determining subsequent full-paper publication (P) of studies reported in animal research abstracts presented at an international conference (A).MethodsWe selected 100 random (using a random-number generator) A from the 2008 Society of Critical Care Medicine Conference. Using a data collection form and study manual, we recorded methodology and result variables from A. We searched PubMed and EMBASE to June 2015, and DOAJ and Google Scholar to May 2017 to screen for subsequent P. Methodology and result variables were recorded from P to determine changes in reporting from A. Predictors of P were examined using Fisher's Exact Test.Results62% (95% CI 52-71%) of studies described in A were subsequently P after a median 19 [IQR 9-33.3] months from conference presentation. Reporting of studies in A was of low quality: randomized 27% (the method of randomization and allocation concealment not described), blinded 0%, sample-size calculation stated 0%, specifying the primary outcome 26%, numbers given with denominators 6%, and stating number of animals used 47%. Only being an orally presented (vs. poster presented) A (14/16 vs. 48/84, p = 0.025) predicted P. Reporting of studies in P was of poor quality: randomized 39% (the method of randomization and allocation concealment not described), likely blinded 6%, primary outcome specified 5%, sample size calculation stated 0%, numbers given with denominators 34%, and number of animals used stated 56%. Changes in reporting from A to P occurred: from non-randomized to randomized 19%, from non-blinded to blinded 6%, from negative to positive outcomes 8%, from having to not having a stated primary outcome 16%, and from non-statistically to statistically significant findings 37%. Post-hoc, using publication data, P was predicted by having positive outcomes (published 62/62, unpublished 33/38; p = 0.003), or statistically significant results (published 58/62, unpublished 20/38; p < 0.001).ConclusionsOnly 62% (95% CI 52-71%) of animal research A are subsequently P; this was predicted by oral presentation of the A, finally having positive outcomes, and finally having statistically significant results. Publication bias is prevalent in critical care animal research.
| S-EPMC5501347 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial showed an overall advantage for operative compared with nonoperative treatment of lumbar disc herniations. Because a recent randomized trial showed no benefit for operative treatment of a disc at the lumbosacral junction (L5-S1), we reviewed subgroups within the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial to assess the effect of herniation level on outcomes of operative and nonoperative care.MethodsThe combined randomized and observation cohorts of the Spine Patient Outcomes Research Trial were analyzed by actual treatment received stratified by level of disc herniation. Overall, 646 L5-S1 herniations, 456 L4-L5 herniations, and eighty-eight upper lumbar (L2-L3 or L3-L4) herniations were evaluated. Primary outcome measures were the Short Form-36 bodily pain and physical functioning scales and the modified Oswestry Disability Index assessed at six weeks, three months, six months, one year, and two years. Treatment effects (the improvement in the operative group minus the improvement in the nonoperative group) were estimated with use of longitudinal regression models, adjusting for important covariates.ResultsAt two years, patients with upper lumbar herniations (L2-L3 or L3-L4) showed a significantly greater treatment effect from surgery than did patients with L5-S1 herniations for all outcome measures: 24.6 and 7.1, respectively, for bodily pain (p = 0.002); 23.4 and 9.9 for Short Form-36 physical functioning (p = 0.014); and -19 and -10.3 for Oswestry Disability Index (p = 0.033). There was a trend toward greater treatment effect for surgery at L4-L5 compared with L5-S1, but this was significant only for the Short Form-36 physical functioning subscale (p = 0.006). Differences in treatment effects between the upper lumbar levels and L4-L5 were significant for Short Form-36 bodily pain only (p = 0.018).ConclusionsThe advantage of operative compared with nonoperative treatment varied by herniation level, with the smallest treatment effects at L5-S1, intermediate effects at L4-L5, and the largest effects at L2-L3 and L3-L4. This difference in effect was mainly a result of less improvement in patients with upper lumbar herniations after nonoperative treatment.
| S-EPMC2657310 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This study aims to analyze the scientific output of long noncoding RNA (lncRNA) research and construct a model to evaluate publications from the past decade qualitatively and quantitatively.Publications from 2007 to 2016 were retrieved from the Web of Science Core Collection database. Microsoft Excel 2016 and CiteSpace IV software were used to analyze publication outputs, journals, countries, institutions, authors, citation counts, ESI top papers, H-index, and research frontiers.A total of 3,008 papers on lncRNA research were identified published by June 17, 2017. The journal, Oncotarget (IF2016, 5.168) ranked first in the number of publications. China had the largest number of publications (1,843), but the United States showed its dominant position in both citation frequency (45,120) and H-index (97). Zhang Y (72 publications) published the most papers, and Guttman M (1,556 citations) had the greatest co-citation counts. The keyword "database" ranked first in research frontiers.The annual number of publications rapidly increased in the past decade. China showed its significant progress in lncRNA research, but the United States was the actual leading country in this field. Many Chinese institutions engaged in lncRNA research but significant collaborations among them were not noted. Guttman M, Mercer TR, Rinn JL, and Gupta RA were identified as good candidates for research collaboration. "Database," "Xist RNA," and "Genome-wide association study" should be closely observed in this field.
| S-EPMC5669954 | biostudies-literature